They no longer return your negatives; they are destroyed, and you get a photo CD with scans on it. I just discovered this the hard way.

The scans that are provided are only scanned at 96 dpi, and the scan is saved as a jpeg, not a tiff. Okay for the web, but sucks for printing. The 5x7 prints that were returned were not at all sharp, and I was shooting Ektar with quality lenses. To add insult to injury, the scans were saved in a folder called "Hires" on the CD. Right.

I called Fuji with the number the kids at Walmart me (1-866-380-3854). I was told that Fuji and Walmart have decided not to return 35mm C-41 process negatives anymore. The person I talked to said that slides, as well as any 120 film would be returned as normal. I'm not sure if I believe that...

To repeat: If you take 35mm C-41 film to be processed at Walmart, your negatives will not be returned.

I wouldn't go to Wal-Mart for that kind of thing either, but maybe that's the only place near the OP that processes film. That said, how stupid and ignorant and lazy does a photo-processing service have to be to destroy negatives?

I remember when I came from vacation once with about 12 rolls of 35mm film and wife wanted them all processed the same day at our local CVS. I said no honey, one at a time. I figured don't put all your eggs in the same basket, and I was right, one roll came out pretty bad, not sure what the cause was, but I am glad the other rolls came out OK.

There is still plenty of film being shot and that is completely absurd to not return negatives. Who the f*** made that stupid decision? That said, I'd never take film that I considered important to a Walmart, CVS, etc.

The reason might be that they could dispense with the fixing or stabilizing steps in the processing, saving time. Plus, if the chemicals for these steps are toxic, which I believe they are, they'd save some disposal costs too. Just speculating.

My local Walwarts have that big Fuji machine in store. I don't know why they would stop returning the film!

San Antonio, TX (in the old city)

"All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing."
-- Edmund Burke
“Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented."
-- Eli Weisel

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." Theodore Roosevelt (1918)

I agree! That's destroying intellectual property. I'm sure some kid thought, "So, what's the big deal?" If that's their policy they should hang a huge banner saying they don't get their negatives back.

I only lost one roll of film there. In the past, I've never had any problem with them. One reason I used them, was they have the cheapest prices for film developing. A roll of 120 (medium format) slide film cost Around $6. A roll of 120 (medium format) C-41 process film cost under $2 to process, and I got a set of small prints back with that. I couldn't even buy the chemicals for that price.

Yes, it is their NEW policy to not return these negatives.

The negatives were scanned at 96 dpi, and the 5X7 prints made from those scans were not very good at all. There is no way I could print anything larger.

Quotefreeradical
....
The negatives were scanned at 96 dpi, and the 5X7 prints made from those scans were not very good at all. There is no way I could print anything larger.

OK, so I am about to bang my head on the desk, WTF were they doing? 96 DPI for 35mm NEGATIVES (24 x 36 mm), so what did you get, 90 pixels x 135 pixels?

No, I scan negatives at 300 dpi for printing. However, the number of pixels is output size dependent. So for example, if I want to print a 4 X 6 picture, the file would be 1200 X 1800 pixels. An 8 X 12 picture would need a file size of 2400 X 3600.

One more problem with their scans, is that they're saved as jpgs, and not tiffs. This means that you need a non destructive editing program like Aperture or Lightroom if you don't want to screw up your files.

When I shot film, I used to take them to a little operation downtown. Cost 3x as much as the cheapies and took two days to get prints, but they did each one by hand and worked to get the best possible print. I'd often get my prints back and there'd be 4 or 5 of the best ones printed in different ways. Well worth it. Of course, they went out of biz years ago.

These days, I wouldn't even deal with film unless I had a darkroom AND was willing to do the work. I can't imagine there are any shops like that around this little city any more.

Depending on print size a 100 dpi scan might be OK but for photo work people should aim for at least 200 for smaller scans. "300dpi" is the traditional for smaller prints to be made, more or less. Bottom line is they scanned his prints with on-screen viewing in mind, not printing in mind, and Fuji should know better.

DPI is mostly irrelevant because it's just a setting in the file and can easily be changed to fit the device it is destined for. The number of pixels is the only thing important.

In other words, let's say your file is 3000x2000 pixels. That 3000 pixels in the long dimension could be 41.67" at 72 DPI, 31.25" at 96 DPI, 15" at 200 DPI, or 5" at 600 DPI. But DPI doesn't mean much until it is printed (or sent to a slide plotter or prepress proofer or whatever). The 3000x2000 image size is the important numbers that tell us the image size in absolute numbers.

QuoteAllGold
DPI is mostly irrelevant because it's just a setting in the file and can easily be changed to fit the device it is destined for. The number of pixels is the only thing important.

In other words, let's say your file is 3000x2000 pixels. That 3000 pixels in the long dimension could be 41.67" at 72 DPI, 31.25" at 96 DPI, 15" at 200 DPI, or 5" at 600 DPI. But DPI doesn't mean much until it is printed (or sent to a slide plotter or prepress proofer or whatever). The 3000x2000 image size is the important numbers that tell us the image size in absolute numbers.

In the context of the original post, it was important, since the dimensions of the negative are so small, directly scanning the negative at 96 (or 72) DPI would have been very few pixels for the entire image. As it turns out, that original statement must have been incorrect.

As it is, 920 x 610 pixels is about 0.5 Megapixels for the entire image, which is fairly low quality.

Was/is this policy prominently posted at Walmart? Did the clerk mention it? If not, that sounds like a class-action lawsuit waiting to happen. What I turn in is my property and I expect to get it back.

QuoteSam3
Was/is this policy prominently posted at Walmart? Did the clerk mention it? If not, that sounds like a class-action lawsuit waiting to happen. What I turn in is my property and I expect to get it back.

I have not developed film in about 10 years, but I think they have a fine print that they are not responsible for anything.

There was something about the negatives on my ticket. Here's a scan of it. I just never in a million years thought that my negatives would not be returned, so I simply put the ticket into my wallet without looking.

It turns out that there are long threads about this at APUG and photo.net...

Yeah sucks ass. If they didn't give back the negatives they could at least scan it at a decent resolution. Thankfully there is a Fromex in my area so I just had them process it for me and scanned myself until I got developing supplies and made one apartment room into a darkroom.

It's better to just process yourself in this day and age. Not hard to keep a room temperature control. Trouble is most bulk film sold is all b&w only.